1 2026:CGHC:11027 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 174 of 2026 Pushpendra Kumar Pandey S/o Avadhesh Kumar Pandey Aged About 37 Years R/o House No. 150, Sai Simran City, Phase- 05, Santoshi Nagar, Mathpurena, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Gunjan Rani Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.03.2026 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 82/2025 registered at Police Station – Mahila Thana, District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 85 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 04 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on the basis of a written complaint submitted by the complainant Ms. Neetika Choubey, Crime No. 82/2025 was registered at Mahila Police Station, Sector-06, Bhilai, District - Durg for offences punishable under Sections 85 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 04 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.03.03 16:02:55 +0530 2 It is alleged that the complainant was married to applicant Pushpendra Kumar Pandey on 21.05.2023 according to social customs. After the marriage, the applicant allegedly taunted and harassed the complainant for bringing insufficient dowry and demanded a Nexon car prior to marriage. To avoid any disruption in the marriage, the complainant's father allegedly transferred an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- to the bank account of the co-accused. The prosecution further alleges that applicant/husband, subjected the complainant to physical and mental cruelty from the very first day of marriage. It is alleged that he is a habitual alcohol consumer and, under intoxication, forced the complainant into unnatural sexual acts, causing severe physical and mental trauma. It is further alleged that on 23.07.2023, applicant deliberately left the complainant at her parental home and avoided taking her back on one pretext or another. Subsequently, on 20.05.2024, he sent a legal notice seeking divorce on false and fabricated grounds, due to which the complainant suffered extreme mental harassment and has since been residing at her parental home. On the basis of the above allegations and supporting materials, the present crime no. 82/2025 was registered and investigation is ongoing. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that in compliance of the order dated 04.02.2026, the parties had appeared before the Mediation Centre of this Court and the husband/applicant has already deposited a sum of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant/wife, which also been received by her from the Mediation Centre of this Court, but the mediation between the parties have become failed. Therefore, she prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant, and from the perusal of the case diary it transpires that in compliance of the order dated 04.02.2026, the parties had appeared before the Mediation Centre of this Court and the husband/applicant has already deposited a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the complainant/wife, which also been received by her from the Mediation Centre of this Court as has been stated by learned counsel for the applicant, but the mediation between the parties have become failed, but considering the fact that the dispute is of matrimonial in nature, hence, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Pushpendra Kumar Pandey on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The Applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The Applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. 4 (d)The Applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The Applicant shall not involve themself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Preeti